OBSESSION WITH GOVERNMENT Published Feb. 16, 2012. Orange County Register

We are obsessed with government. Back in the 1950’s there was a comic strip titled There Oughta Be a Law in which the pet peeves of one’s daily life were parodied. The suggestion was that anything that your fellow citizens did that bugged you ought to be restrained by enacting a new law. These days it seems that we have advanced this sentiment from parody to reality. But at what cost? Certainly at the sacrifice of many personal freedoms, but the price paid is yet greater.

Our growing nanny state is eroding the significance of personal responsibility and even diminishing the role of parenting – at great consequence. If someone is obese the blame is deflected to the neighborhood restaurant. If a child bullies another at school we need an anti-bulling law. Apparently our school officials and the local PTA have become ineffectual or unresponsive. But are these and other like problems better handled by law enforcement? Is the enforcement of such trite statutes the proper use of the limited time and resources of our police forces? When our legislature enacts such laws they transfer much of the responsibility from those are directly involved and who best understand the circumstances to a detached third party who is far less equipped to evaluate and manage the problem or to respond in a timely manner.

In 2011, California passed more than 700 new laws. A bill passed in 2010 requires the installation of door locks that can be locked from the inside on certain public school buildings. Is there any doubt that school administrators are making other equally egregious errors? Must we enact at law for each such offense uncovered? Is it not the job of the administrators to figure these things out and make wise decisions without requiring a legislative act? Is it wise to utilize the cumbersome, expensive, inflexible, and largely permanent mechanism of legislation for the purposes of micro-managing our institutions, businesses, and personal decisions?

There is no underlying rhyme or reason to legislative action. Sadly, a primary motivation for enacting laws is personal political gain. The advancement of legislation is too often a function of its publicity value, or is a response to whoever yells the loudest and longest – with little or no consideration for the lasting consequences for the rest of us.

California is currently struggling with a budget crisis, yet our representatives continue to of churn out new legislation as though we were flush with cash. They are so enabled because the majority of the voting citizenry deems their actions to be commendable, even heroic. To the contrary, scrutiny has revealed that the typical government program fails to fully achieve its objectives, some miss the mark entirely, yet they remain. Virtually all have unintended consequences, and make no mistake all new legislation ultimately requires new taxes in one form or other.

In a democracy, the reach of government is determined by voters. Those who value personal freedoms, uphold personal responsibility, and recognize the limitations of government actions must speak out against superfluous legislation and support candidates who understand the need for restraint -- those that do not view the maximization of legislation as their objective or as a vehicle for political gain.

           We the people are far from perfect. However, it is we as individuals that are the effectual architects and overseers of our circumstances. A society that looks to government as social watchdog and financial benefactor rather than to individual responsibility is not a healthy one, but one that is in decline. Laws are necessary for an orderly, productive society. However, our preoccupation with government as the prescription for social health has become a destructive obsession.